It's the New Hampshire election law, not the State
Constitution.  It simply says the primary shall be at
least a week earlier than any other state's primary,
and gives the Secretary of State discretion to adjust
the date to maintain that.

Other states have tried the same thing, especially
Delaware.  But Delaware always gives up in the end. 
The major parties both recognize the traditional
status of New Hampshire's "firstness", so won't
accredit other states that try to overcome it.

--- RJLipkin@aol.com wrote:

    Today, I caught the tail-end of a discussion of
presidential primaries on 
NPR, and heard a remark that puzzled me. The remark
was that New Hampshire's 
Constitution requires the state to be the first
presidential primary in the 
nation.  Since New Hampshire cannot control the
legislation of other states, 
just what sort of requirement is this?  Several
humorous scenarios come to mind, 
but I will be satisfied with a straightforward
explanation of how it is 
possible for one state, constitutionally or
statutorily, to itself decide that it 
shall be first among equals in presidential
primaries.  

Bobby Lipkin
Widener University School of Law
Delaware

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree